Tabion v. Mufti’s Empirical Analysis
73 F.3d 535 · 1996
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably 196 W. Va. 326 - West Virginia Health Care Cost Review Authority v. Boone Memorial Hospital (1996), United States v. Al-Hamdi (2004)
7 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1602 (§ 4 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976) · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866)
Relies on Bibby v. United States · Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc. v. Avagliano · Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd · United States v. Stuart · Biscayne 21 Condominium, Inc. v. South Atlantic Financial Corp.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Treaties are contracts between sovereigns, and as such, should be construed to give effect to the intent of the signatories.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Here, as in most cases invoking sovereign immunity, there may appear to be some unfairness to the person against whom the invocation occurs. But it must be remembered that the outcome merely reflects policy choices already made. Policymakers in Congress and the Executive Branch clearly have believed that diplomatic immunity not only ensures the efficient functioning of diplomatic mission in foreign states, but fosters goodwill and enhances relations among nations. Thus, they have determined that apparent inequity to a private individual is outweighed by the great injury to the public that would arise from permitting suit against the entity or its agents calling for application of immunity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When examined in context, the term “commercial activity” [as used in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations] does not have so broad a meaning as to include occasional service contracts as [plaintiff] contends, but rather relates only to trade or business activity engaged in for personal profit. Accepting the broader meaning fails to take into account the treaty’s background and negotiating history, as well as its subsequent interpretation. It also ignores the relevance of the remainder of the phrase — “outside his official functions.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.